The Emporia weekly news. [volume] (Emporia, Kan.) 1881-1889, 1887-02-03


Arguments Pro and Con In the bell Case
attorney HfII Charges Prof. Bell
with Fraud.
WASHINGTON, Jan. 27.-The United
States supreme court room was crowded
this morning when the court re-assem-
bled to continue the hearing in the ar
gument in the telephone cases, for it
was understood that Mr.. Hill, for the
Overland and Peoples companies would
present the charges of fraud in the pro-
curement in the Bell patent. He began
by asserting that Prof. Bell had changed
the specifications of his patent while his
application was pending. He was pro-
ceeding to explain why these changes
were made. and why, in his Judgment,
they amounted to fraud, when he was
interrupted by Justice Miller, who en-
quired If it was not the custom of in
Venters to change the specifications
while the application was pending. As
he understood it, inventors in such
cases always tried to improve
their specifications, and make them
as perfect as possible before the ap-
plication was acted upon. Mr.. Hill re-
piled that up to certain limits that was
true but not after specifications had
been definitely fixed and sworn TO.
changes alleged in this case had been
made after Mr.. Bell surreptitiOusly OBJ
tanned knowledge of the contents of a
caveat filed by Prof. Elisha Gray, and
that the changes were intended to in
clude in his Mr.. Bell's) patent inven-
tions which he himself had not made
but which he had wrongfully appro-
priated from the caveat of Prof. Gray.
AT this point Mr.. Hill was again inter-
TI1ufa6 hv InGfi0n Miller. yUhn iTn1E odd
''Do understand that you propose to
set up fraud as a defence in this case
and to attack the patent On that
ground. Mr.. Hill-"We do not
plead fraud as defence
but this is court of
equity, and when the compliments
come here and ask for equity they must
do equity. They must come with clean
hands," Justice Miller, st has been
repeatedly held that patent cannot be
attacked for fraud in this court unless
there has been separate and valid
proceeding upon that ground in the
courts below, a proceeding in which the
issue of fraud has been distinctly
made, Mr.. Hill replied that if the
court refused to hear the allegations of
fraud he would of course proceed no
further with this part of his argument.
Mr.. Justice Harland then said that,
speaking for himself, he thought the
counsel should be allowed to proceed
with his argument in the manner
in which he had planned it.
Mr.. Justice Bradley agreed with this
view of the case and said that if
the argument should be found to
raise question which it was not prop
er for the court to consider at this time
i'll favor of allowing Mr.. Hill to pro-
coed. Mr.. Hill then resumed his argu-
ment. He maintained first that in
February, 1875, after Prof. Bell had
filed his application for a patent he sur
reptitiously obtained through Exam
liner Wilbur'S room in the patent Office
information with regard to the contents
of a caVeat fled by Prol. Elisha Gray to
protect telephone process invented by
him; that Prof. Bell awaited himself of
the knowledge thus attained, to amend
and widen his own specifications so as
to include many of the features of Prof.
Gray's invention. Second, that between
February IA and 10, 1876, Pollock &
Bailey, Bells patent attorneys, in con-
sequence of the guilty knowledge which
they had of the contents of Gray's
caveat bodily interpolated an important
invention and claim therefor into
Bells specifications. AS proof of such
fraudulent Interpolation Mr.. Hill re-
ferTed to two documents, one copy of
Professor Bells specifications which
was given in January, in 1876, to
George Brown to be taken to England
for the purpose of obtaining a patent
there, and the other certified copy of
the interlined and interpOlated speci-
ficatiOns which had at one time been on
file in the patent Office but which he
said Prof. Bell or his attorneys, by col
fusion with the employees of
the patent Office had subsequently
removed and destroyed to conceal
the fraudulent interpretations, sustitut-
ing therefor clean copy in which the
interlineationS had been incorporated.
He maintained that the George Brown
copy of the specifications was the
original form in which they were fled;
that the certified copy of the Specifica-
lions obtained from the patent office in
1879, and used as an exhibit in the
Dowd case, showing as it did thirty
nine alterations and interlineatiOnS, was
the next step in the fraud, and that
such fraud has been contaminated by
the abstraction of this interpolated and
interlined copy from the files of the
patent Office and substitution for it of
clean copy some time between 1879,
when the transcript used III the Dowd
case was made, and in
1885, when it was discovered
that this transcript had disappeared
and clean copy purpOrting to be the
original had been put in its place. Mr..
StorroW replied for the American Bell
Telephone company and in defence of
Professor Bell he devoted himself, first,
to an attempt to show that such changes
as had been made in Professor Bells
specification after the George Brown
copy had been sent to England were
changes to which he had perfect legal
right; that they were made in due form
and that they had no relation whatever
to the Gray caveat, but were
the results of Professor Bells
independent thinking. He then took
up the subject of the interlined and in
terpolated copy of Prof. Bells specifica-
tions which Mr.. Hill alleged had been
obtained in its present shape from the
patent Office in 1879, and upon which
the charges of fraud had been mainly
based. Mr.. Storrow said he could ex-
plain to the court in very few words
the original of the sO-called changes